THE Transport Select Committee (TSC) this week gave the government's £32billion High Speed Two (HS2) project its backing, despite a series of damning criticisms.

MPs on the committee supported the Department for Transport's (DfT) economic case, which had been so hotly debated, but slammed the public consultation exercise, time-saving rationale, carbon-saving claims, proposed mitigation measures and service frequency.

DfT's preferred option of a Heathrow spur route, which could see parts of Uxbridge, Hillingdon village and Hayes affected, was another aspect of the current HS2 proposal that came under fire from TSC.

Residents in Ruislip, Ickenham and Harefield could also be heartened by the recommendation that HS2 instead be taken directly through Heathrow Airport - making a route via north-west London less likely.

However, little detail of the route was actually discussed in the report released today (Tuesday) because the parliamentary body was not tasked to examine it.

What could really surprise those who have followed the HS2 debate is how, in examining the national case for HS2 and making a long list of reasons why the government's argument is wrong, TSC still concluded that it should go ahead.

In the summary of findings from its five-month inquiry, which heard more than 200 submissions of evidence, TSC stated: "The absence of a transport strategy makes it hard to assess how HS2 relates to other major transport infrastructure schemes, such as bridging the north-south divide.

"We recommend that if the government decides to proceed with HS2 it should set out in more detail than is available in DfT's business plan not only why HS2 is desirable but also how it fits within an overall transport strategy."

Explaining its support for HS2, the TSC report stated: "We do not wish our successors to be faced with a situation in 10 years’ time where demand has continued to grow but insufficient time remains to provide the necessary capacity.

"Twenty-five years after completion of the M25 and 30 years after the opening of the Paris–Lyon high-speed rail line, HS2 offers a new era of inter-urban travel in Britain."

In conducting their inquiries the members of TSC, made up of 11 backbench MPs drawn from each of the three biggest parties, visited several European cities linked by high-speed rail networks.

"We saw for ourselves the regeneration of Lille that has been achieved through sustained economic development efforts integrated with the high-speed rail station," they concluded.

TSC also predicted that HS2 would "offer cheaper fares" on an expanded railway network. However, negatives for HS2 were easier to find in the report than positives.

"It is disappointing that even basic information on the Y-network, such as the number and location of stations, was not available during the public consultation.

"There should be an urgent strategic appraisal of phase two before a final decision on phase one is taken."

Although agreeing that high-speed rail was the best way to solve capacity problems, TSC queried the need for trains to travel above 200mph.

"A high-speed line operating at less than 250mph may offer greater opportunities for mitigation, as well as an opportunity to follow existing transport corridors.

"We are concerned the decision to build a 250mph line prematurely ruled out other route options."

There was criticism of the government's rationale for HS2: "It is disappointing that a major strategic scheme is being assessed on the basis of the value of travel time savings not universally accepted."

And doubts over purported carbon savings: "It is not clear that even the Y-network will substantially reduce demand for domestic aviation.

"HS2 should not be promoted as a carbon-reduction scheme."

Of the countryside, TSC stated: "We recognise that HS2 is likely to have substantial impacts on the countryside, communities and people along its route.

"It is unfortunate that it crosses the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty - a national asset."

And of a Heathrow link, the report said: "We are concerned that a Heathrow spur may prove more costly than a single line via Heathrow.

"Moreover, no direct HS2 Heathrow connection is planned until 2032 at the earliest and the route was not part of the public consultation.

"It is unacceptable for debate on such major decisions to be conducted through a series of nods and winks in the press."

The TSC report concluded: "We are clear that the case for HS2 depends on completion of the Y-network. In the longer term, it should be expanded to include Scotland, Wales and other parts of the UK."